The people of Sweden have officially declared that they want no part in the single European currency. On September 15, just two days after the brutal stabbing of beloved pro-euro Foreign Minister Anna Lindh, Sweden voted with a decisive 56 to 42 percent majority that they prefer not to adopt the euro. As the search continues for Lindh's killer, anti-euro enthusiasts in countries like Britain and Denmark celebrate a considerable victory, and the disappointed Swedish government sheepishly puts away its pro-euro plans for the time being.In the case of Sweden, a 15 percent win on the side of the "no-to-the-euro" believers came as an unpleasant surprise to its ruling party. A fervent EU advocate, Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson had campaigned hard for a Yes vote to show his country's dedication to the European project. Ministers were hopeful that shock over the death of Sweden's best loved politician would inspire sympathy for her cause, but Swedes proved their anti-euro conviction to be so strong that it remained unaffected by the tragedy.

What is it about this concept of a single European currency that has grasped the time and energy of parliaments, analysts and the media for over a decade and that is so seemingly irresolvable? The three remaining countries left in the EU who have not adopted the Euro, Sweden, Britain and Denmark, admit to be stalemated in an uncomfortable limbo between the positives and negatives of a United Europe.

Part of what makes the decision so impossible is that the answer depends upon a complicated clutter of factors that are not only economically difficult to predict, but that also challenge mindsets deeply rooted in the people's ideology.

The basis of the economic pro-euro argument is trade. In the case of Sweden, it was a chance for this large, confident country to fully establish itself as a trading nation and reap the benefits of a common exchange rate with its neighbors. There is no doubt that big business would gain the most from a single currency; as Sir Richard Branson, business tycoon of the Virgin Group said, "Having a separate currency from the consumers and competitors of our largest market is a big barrier to success." The Left argues that this in itself is one of the greatest evils of the euro; as Caroline Lucas, writer for the Guardian Newspaper points out, "joining the euro...represents a shift in power from democratic institutions to the unaccountable European Central Bank and its corporate bedfellows...it furthers corporate globalization and entrenches its goals."

Lack of freedom and loss of sovereignty is one of the most powerful anti-euro arguments - although many recognize that a close alliance with Europe would be politically useful, citizens are terrified of giving up what they feel is their crucial national identity. The people of Britain, who historically have been more isolated politically and geographically from the European continent, are especially absorbed by this concern. Grassroots anti-euro activists, often referred to as "little Englanders," argue that adopting the euro would weaken Britain's competitive edge and drive a stake through its cultural identity and sovereignty. As Nigel Farage of the UK Independence Party said, "Should we continue to run our economic affairs or be managed by people in Brussels?"

The question has so far been left unanswered. Although the people of Britain, Sweden and Denmark are becoming frustrated with the "all talk and no trousers" approach of their leaders as to the exact timing of what is currently assumed to be an inevitable merge with Europe, the Swedish vote shows that when asked directly, a sense of national identity is ultimately more compelling than promises of economic prosperity. The results may have disappointed many, but it serves as a reminder of the power of the people.